ADVERTISEMENT

Are the Investigations the Cover-Up?

TigerGrowls

Woodrush
Gold Member
Dec 21, 2001
20,795
12,094
113
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/12/are_the_investigations_the_coverup.html

December 26, 2018
Are the Investigations the Cover-Up?
By Bryce Buchanan
Those of us who have been paying attention know that serious crimes were committed at the highest levels of government in an attempt to exonerate Hillary Clinton and frame Donald Trump. There was collusion between government agencies, including collusion with foreign agents, to illegally influence the 2016 Presidential election. There is enough evidence on the table to be confident of these claims.

And those of us who care about rule of law, who want to see justice done to the criminals in this conspiracy, have been waiting for years to see that happen. We hear that these serious matters are being investigated. We hear that there are whistleblowers inside the government who want to come forward and expose the corruption. We hear that there are many, many more documents which will substantiate our worst fears about one of the greatest scandals in the history of our country.

We have been assured that there are several investigations looking into the various aspect of this abuse of power. Inspector General Michael Horowitz, prosecutor John Huber, and others are looking into the corruption. Mueller is supposedly tasked with exposing foreign influence on the Presidential election.

But what if the ‘investigations’ are really the cover-up? What if the investigations are carefully structured to protect criminal actions rather than expose them? What if the investigations are actually being used to hide evidence from the citizenry?

Peter Strzok, Andrew McCabe and others discussed the need for an “insurance policy” in case Trump won. Was this “insurance policy” intended to protect deep-state criminals from exposure? Mueller’s role is not to investigate collusion with foreign agents, or he would be investigating Christopher Steele and his Russian sources, along with the foreigners who worked with our government to infiltrate the Trump campaign. He would investigate the illegal funding of Steele’s lies and how the lies were fed to the public by ‘bad cops’ and complicit media. This is obviously not the goal of Mueller’s team.

211148_5_.png


Mueller’s key role is to have nearly absolute control over what information is released to investigators or the public. Mueller determines what Horowitz and Huber can see. Mueller can hide anythinghe wants by claiming that release of the information would hinder his ‘investigation’. He has given Rod Rosenstein a list of lines of inquiry that will not be allowed. Rosenstein, who volunteered to be part of the soft coup, is happy to comply. We have witnessed Rosenstein repeatedly refuse to turn over documents to Congress, flagrantly obstructing its oversight role.

What is the most effective way to hide the truth and protect the deep-state criminals? It’s the never-ending Mueller investigation. Sure, Mueller’s team is still in the business of promoting the Trump-Russia fiction, but the most important role of this ‘investigation’ may be to obstruct any real investigation.

Conspiracy theories become conspiracy facts when enough evidence piles up to support the theory. Consider this evidence, starting before the election:

  • Comey wrote a letter exonerating Hillary from her very intentional crimes long before she or key witnesses were interviewed.
  • Hillary’s key co-conspirators were given immunity, allowed to share attorneys, sit in on each other’s depositions, and even destroy evidence. This was a sham investigation.
  • Hillary’s influence peddling through the Clinton Foundation was effectively swept under the rug. The Clintons enriched themselves by selling future favors, often to foreign entities. The foundation has been called “The Biggest Charity Fraud Ever”.
  • The Trump-Russia collusion narrative was developed as part of the effort to undermine Trump. It was not started by any actionable intelligence. Spies were placed in the Trump campaign to aid the false narrative and to allow further illicit intelligence gathering.
  • Spying on the Trump campaign was authorized by presenting fraudulent, hearsay evidence to FISA Court judges. This criminal act led to many other criminal acts including rampant “unmasking” of American citizens associated with Trump. Comey and Rosenstein both played roles in FISA abuse. White House officials did much of the unmasking.
  • On September 28, 2016, Peter Strzok texted Lisa Page that “hundreds of thousands” of email messages from Anthony Weiner’s computer had been turned over to the FBI by U.S. Attorneys who were conducting an investigation into Weiner’s sex crimes. This was a treasure trove of information about Huma and Hillary. The FBI immediately hid the information for a month while they figured out how to whitewash it to protect Hillary. The bomb-control team successfully defused another bomb. Surely, they expected a future reward from President H.R. Clinton.
Inspector General Horowitz’s June report had the goal of soft-peddling criminal behavior. The report said that some unfortunate things were done, but there was no reason to think that bias played a key role in important decisions. It did not find fault with things like granting immunity to the man who lied to the FBI and destroyed Hillary’s illegal server. As we have learned, lying to the FBI can be fine, depending on who does the lying. Destroying subpoenaed evidence is okay too, at times.

Horowitz’ public statement about his toothless report was followed by FBI Director Christopher Wray telling us not to worry about a thing because he intended to schedule a day when FBI agents would have a meeting to discuss bias. Okay then -- I guess that takes care of it.

Last year, when members of Congress were rightly frustrated about evidence being hidden, there were increasing calls for a special prosecutor to investigate surveillance abuses by the Obama administration, the shady Uranium One deal, and the Clinton Foundation’s influence peddling. The idea of appointing a truly independent prosecutor was thwarted by Jeff Sessions, who appointed a career insider to do the investigation instead. Sessions promised that an Obama holdover in Utah, John Huber, would do a “full, complete and objective evaluation of these matters.”

At this point, there is every reason to believe that the purpose of Huber’s investigation is to hide the truth, not to find it; to protect the criminals, not to charge them. The key witnesses in each of the matters under investigation have not even been contacted. It appears that no grand juries have been empaneled. Tom Fitton, of Judicial Watch says, “Huber wasn’t tapped to investigate anything”, he was just “a distraction”.

What we are witnessing here is a carefully planned and orchestrated cover-up of a series of very serious crimes. The deep swamp is pretending to investigate the deep swamp.

This cover-up would not be possible if the mainstream media were honest and aggressive fact-finders, but they actually function as a branch of the Democratic Party. The cover-up would fail if Republicans were unified in absolutely demanding to see all the evidence that is currently being hidden, but Republican ‘leaders’ do not unify and fight hard for anything. They appear to be comfortable with losing this battle.

Victors write the accepted history of events. It is possible that the story here will be that good men like Strzok, Comey, Rosenstein, and Mueller protected America from a vast right-wing conspiracy. Donald Trump, the victim of most of the crimes, will be portrayed as the villain.
 
  • Like
Reactions: orangelvis
Just unbelievable that anyone could read this and think: yup. Seems right.

Just outrageous unfounded claims from the first sentence on.

Change your source of news.

LOL. Its obvious that there is a deep divide on the opinion related to the state of affairs in our nation and what our national policies should be related to a number of big issues. I respect everyone's right to an opinion while maintaining my own. I just hope we all find out the undeniable truth in the near future one way or another. I will own it if I am wrong about President Trump and what happened. In the end, its not about who is right or wrong, but about the undeniable truth and what is best for our nation and I am all for that. My money says the right still holds the Trump Card at this time. ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: orangelvis
LOL. Its obvious that there is a deep divide on the opinion related to the state of affairs in our nation and what our national policies should be related to a number of big issues. I respect everyone's right to an opinion while maintaining my own. I just hope we all find out the undeniable truth in the near future one way or another. I will own it if I am wrong about President Trump and what happened. In the end, its not about who is right or wrong, but about the undeniable truth and what is best for our nation and I am all for that. My money says the right still holds the Trump Card at this time. ;)
How will you own it if you don’t acknowledge facts?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rychek4
Trumps train is crashed. Did you all watch his pressers the last couple days? ooooooof. He is surrendering the middle east to Russia and ISIS.
 
Trumps train is crashed. Did you all watch his pressers the last couple days? ooooooof. He is surrendering the middle east to Russia and ISIS.

ISIS was decimated by Trump...keep up. Syria will mind itself as a sovereign state and the combination of Syria,Russia, Turkey will handle if any remnants of ISIS resurface. Obama and his commie cohorts built ISIS up anyway....its a fact like Big Bad Don said.
 
Last edited:
ISIS was decimated by Trump...keep up. Syria will mind itself as a sovereign state and the combination of Syria,Russia, Turkey will handle if any remnants of ISIS resurface. Obama and his commie cohorts built ISIS up anyway....its a fact like by Big Bad Don said.
None of what you think will happen, will happen. 0 percent. Have the facts of your previous predicitions going awry have any influence on you changing your tune on Trump? Nope.
Trump is a big phoney and so are you with your self assured bs predictions. I'll take real military intelligence over your gut feelings.
 
None of what you think will happen, will happen. 0 percent. Have the facts of your previous predicitions going awry have any influence on you changing your tune on Trump? Nope.
Trump is a big phoney and so are you with your self assured bs predictions. I'll take real military intelligence over your gut feelings.

Trump decimated ISIS as a functional force....fact. Trump is running the country correctly. Build that Wall!
 
Trump decimated ISIS as a functional force....fact. Trump is running the country correctly. Build that Wall!
And yet... the generals disagree with this approach. Shocking. Trump is running the country correctely... what a white wash statement.
I guess since he gave me 300 dollars back from the federal government that should be my baseline for correct running of the government.
The EPA is being run by coal lobbyists, the department of education is being run by people actively trying to destroy it. The white house ethics office has been closed down for 2 years. I could go on and on. If you wanted a swamp drain ... and you viewed the swamp as corruption, I can tell you with absurdness, you got swampier.

NK is laughing at us as it starts up its nuke program again.
Iran is laughing at us as it starts up its nuke program again.
Russia is laughing as its influence grows in the middle east. I'm sure you'd say this is fine. Trump thinks its fine. He'd maybe make a good general.

I don't hate the new NAFTA or USMCA or whatever, its the exact same deal but Mexico has to pay its workers better and let them unionize. But its not a big difference for us and what did we get out of it?

The tariffs have lost us farmers markets in Asia, and we don't know if they will get them back as China is going to South America for soy beans etc now. They are being subsidized by billions of dollars in aide from the federal government due to this. The tariffs have no end in sight and some economists are blaming the down turn in the market, in part, on this policy. I agree that China has got to play ball, but this was a risky move and its not paying. It might go down as his grossest miscalculation.

Oh and the government is shut down right now because the President didn't want to pass a bi partisan bill to fund the government, because he needs his wall, which he has failed to articulate in a meaningful way in which it will help us.

He failed to repeal obamacare, because people, at the end of the day, want healthcare. They don't want to go bankrupt over it. Trump said he'd get everyone health care, he didn't, and he wont.

I could go on and on. It doesn't matter though if you don't want to see it. Facts are facts. He isn't running the government how it should be run. Its broken, its shut down.
 
I don't hate the new NAFTA or USMCA or whatever, its the exact same deal but Mexico has to pay its workers better and let them unionize. But its not a big difference for us and what did we get out of it?
The big issue was pulling out of TPP, which was designed to let us leverage East Asia against China. Replacing that with tariffs was a giant miscalculation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: firegiver
The big issue was pulling out of TPP, which was designed to let us leverage East Asia against China. Replacing that with tariffs was a giant miscalculation.
I remember thinking at the time that ok maybe he is going to re negotiate this deal. But nope he just trashed it and screwed up years of negotiations and walked away.
 
I remember thinking at the time that ok maybe he is going to re negotiate this deal. But nope he just trashed it and screwed up years of negotiations and walked away.

Trump’s less than intelligent followers respond to him best when he declares an enemy. And he has many enemies... Obama, Hilary, Obamacare, Democrats, the press (except fox). That is why he recently tweeted that he wants to make a deal with Democrats to open the govt, the immediately tweeted agin ripping the Democrats as pro crime and illegal immigration. Usually when you are trying to negotiate with someone, you don’t shit on them publicly in the process. His followers want him to dismantle everything Obama did (even those on Obamacare). His followers are more concerned with sticking it to the libs than moving the country forward.
 
Trump’s less than intelligent followers respond to him best when he declares an enemy. And he has many enemies... Obama, Hilary, Obamacare, Democrats, the press (except fox). That is why he recently tweeted that he wants to make a deal with Democrats to open the govt, the immediately tweeted agin ripping the Democrats as pro crime and illegal immigration. Usually when you are trying to negotiate with someone, you don’t shit on them publicly in the process. His followers want him to dismantle everything Obama did (even those on Obamacare). His followers are more concerned with sticking it to the libs than moving the country forward.
And yet the argument i keep hearing is that Dems aren't giving Trump the wall because they just can't let him have a win. He vetoed a bi partisan bill... he owned it. He created the shutdown and said it was his doing.
Then later blames the Dems.

I mean this new reality of blame blame blame and cry cry cry is so annoying. If you want a Wall, then argue for it. Convince the US voting population its needed. Because, they are not convinced in the least and it shows.
 
His followers want him to dismantle everything Obama did (even those on Obamacare).
I freely admit that Obamacare was the best of a bunch of bad solutions. I don't really like single payer but I can't see a way to decouple healthcare from employment, which would be necessary to create a competitive marketplace like we have for auto insurance.

My father-in-law was staunchly against Obamacare but has now been on it for about 3 years.
 
And yet the argument i keep hearing is that Dems aren't giving Trump the wall because they just can't let him have a win. He vetoed a bi partisan bill... he owned it. He created the shutdown and said it was his doing.
Then later blames the Dems.

I mean this new reality of blame blame blame and cry cry cry is so annoying. If you want a Wall, then argue for it. Convince the US voting population its needed. Because, they are not convinced in the least and it shows.

A majority of the public is very concerned about border security and wants the wall. Not sure what communist propaganda you been reading that states otherwise.
 
Come on what?

You're not willing to believe that Trump policy has decimated ISIS. You want proof. You won't take the word of Trump, Generals, etc. I get that. So do you also question the claims that Trump colluded with Russia with the same veracity? If not, what is the constant by which you do the math?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerGrowls
You're not willing to believe that Trump policy has decimated ISIS. You want proof. You won't take the word of Trump, Generals, etc. I get that. So do you also question the claims that Trump colluded with Russia with the same veracity? If not, what is the constant by which you do the math?
I thought the controversy was that Trump was claiming victory and pulling out while the Generals told him not to. Mattis resigned in protest. Are you actually reading the news or just following Trump's tweets?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rychek4
I thought the controversy was that Trump was claiming victory and pulling out while the Generals told him not to. Mattis resigned in protest. Are you actually reading the news or just following Trump's tweets?

So, you are saying the generals disagreed with the pullout because ISIS is still alive and well? I think you're making assumptions. I don't Tweet. Never have, so there's that.Just because Mattis may have wanted to stay, (we're talking about 2K troops), doesn't mean that Mattis didn't think ISIS had been defeated. You've been manipulated; yet again, by the msm. The 2kK troops that we're bringing back, are not the balance of power in the region. Our tech and air superiority is the balance of power. I love Mattis, btw. The dems and the msm never liked Mattis until he resigned. Do you not read the news?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerGrowls
Surpise:

According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, American Thinker has published Anti-LGBT articles, as well as those by prominent white nationalist, Jared Taylor. Further, American Thinker routinely publishes conspiracy theories, such as those by Pamela Geller, who is also on the SPLC’s hate watch list due to anti-Islam positions: Report: Obama said ‘I Am a Muslim’, which has been debunked as a false claim. They have also promoted conspiracies about the Seth Rich Murder and they have published numerous articles that are not supportive of the consensus of science, such as this one: The Hoax of ‘Climate Change’

HEIL TRUMP!!
 
So, you are saying the generals disagreed with the pullout because ISIS is still alive and well? I think you're making assumptions. I don't Tweet. Never have, so there's that.Just because Mattis may have wanted to stay, (we're talking about 2K troops), doesn't mean that Mattis didn't think ISIS had been defeated. You've been manipulated; yet again, by the msm. The 2kK troops that we're bringing back, are not the balance of power in the region. Our tech and air superiority is the balance of power. I love Mattis, btw. The dems and the msm never liked Mattis until he resigned. Do you not read the news?
Wrong I never said that. jfc. all this nonesense about MSM blah blah . Just READ HIS RESIGNATION LETTER:
Dear Mr. President:

I have been privileged to serve as our country’s 26th Secretary of Defense which has allowed me to serve alongside our men and women of the Department in defense of our citizens and our ideals.

I am proud of the progress that has been made over the past two years on some of the key goals articulated in our National Defense Strategy: putting the Department on a more sound budgetary footing, improving readiness and lethality in our forces, and reforming the Department’s business practices for greater performance. Our troops continue to provide the capabilities needed to prevail in conflict and sustain strong US global influence.

One core belief I have always held is that our strength as a nation is inextricably linked to the strength of our unique and comprehensive system of alliances and partnerships. While the US remains the indispensable nation in the free world, we cannot protect our interests or serve that role effectively without maintaining strong alliances and showing respect to those allies. Like you, I have said from the beginning that the armed forces of the United States should not be the policeman of the world. Instead, we must use all tools of American power to provide for the common defense, including providing effective leadership to our alliances. NATO’s 29 democracies demonstrated that strength in their commitment to fighting alongside us following the 9-11 attack on America. The Defeat-ISIS coalition of 74 nations is further proof.

Similarly, I believe we must be resolute and unambiguous in our approach to those countries whose strategic interests are increasingly in tension with ours. It is clear that China and Russia, for example, want to shape a world consistent with their authoritarian model—gaining veto authority over other nations’ economic, diplomatic, and security decisions—to promote their own interests at the expense of their neighbors, America and our allies. That is why we must use all the tools of American power to provide for the common defense.

My views on treating allies with respect and also being clear-eyed about both malign actors and strategic competitors are strongly held and informed by over four decades of immersion in these issues. We must do everything possible to advance an international order that is most conducive to our security, prosperity and values, and we are strengthened in this effort by the solidarity of our alliances.


Because you have the right to a Secretary of Defense whose views are better aligned with yours on these and other subjects, I believe it is right for me to step down from my position. The end date for my tenure is February 28, 2019, a date that should allow sufficient time for a successor to be nominated and confirmed as well as to make sure the Department’s interests are properly articulated and protected at upcoming events to include Congressional posture hearings and the NATO Defense Ministerial meeting in February. Further, that a full transition to a new Secretary of Defense occurs well in advance of the transition of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in September in order to ensure stability within the Department.

I pledge my full effort to a smooth transition that ensures the needs and interests of the 2.15 million Service Members and 732,079 DoD civilians receive undistracted attention of the Department at all times so that they can fulfill their critical, round-the-clock mission to protect the American people.

I very much appreciate this opportunity to serve the nation and our men and women in uniform.

James N. Mattis

My point remains that he is claiming victory while retreating and Mattis clearly is telling him here he disagrees with pulling out and insists on supporting our allies. He's talking about the Kurds if you don't know.
 
Wrong I never said that. jfc. all this nonesense about MSM blah blah . Just READ HIS RESIGNATION LETTER:
Dear Mr. President:

I have been privileged to serve as our country’s 26th Secretary of Defense which has allowed me to serve alongside our men and women of the Department in defense of our citizens and our ideals.

I am proud of the progress that has been made over the past two years on some of the key goals articulated in our National Defense Strategy: putting the Department on a more sound budgetary footing, improving readiness and lethality in our forces, and reforming the Department’s business practices for greater performance. Our troops continue to provide the capabilities needed to prevail in conflict and sustain strong US global influence.

One core belief I have always held is that our strength as a nation is inextricably linked to the strength of our unique and comprehensive system of alliances and partnerships. While the US remains the indispensable nation in the free world, we cannot protect our interests or serve that role effectively without maintaining strong alliances and showing respect to those allies. Like you, I have said from the beginning that the armed forces of the United States should not be the policeman of the world. Instead, we must use all tools of American power to provide for the common defense, including providing effective leadership to our alliances. NATO’s 29 democracies demonstrated that strength in their commitment to fighting alongside us following the 9-11 attack on America. The Defeat-ISIS coalition of 74 nations is further proof.

Similarly, I believe we must be resolute and unambiguous in our approach to those countries whose strategic interests are increasingly in tension with ours. It is clear that China and Russia, for example, want to shape a world consistent with their authoritarian model—gaining veto authority over other nations’ economic, diplomatic, and security decisions—to promote their own interests at the expense of their neighbors, America and our allies. That is why we must use all the tools of American power to provide for the common defense.

My views on treating allies with respect and also being clear-eyed about both malign actors and strategic competitors are strongly held and informed by over four decades of immersion in these issues. We must do everything possible to advance an international order that is most conducive to our security, prosperity and values, and we are strengthened in this effort by the solidarity of our alliances.


Because you have the right to a Secretary of Defense whose views are better aligned with yours on these and other subjects, I believe it is right for me to step down from my position. The end date for my tenure is February 28, 2019, a date that should allow sufficient time for a successor to be nominated and confirmed as well as to make sure the Department’s interests are properly articulated and protected at upcoming events to include Congressional posture hearings and the NATO Defense Ministerial meeting in February. Further, that a full transition to a new Secretary of Defense occurs well in advance of the transition of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in September in order to ensure stability within the Department.

I pledge my full effort to a smooth transition that ensures the needs and interests of the 2.15 million Service Members and 732,079 DoD civilians receive undistracted attention of the Department at all times so that they can fulfill their critical, round-the-clock mission to protect the American people.

I very much appreciate this opportunity to serve the nation and our men and women in uniform.

James N. Mattis

My point remains that he is claiming victory while retreating and Mattis clearly is telling him here he disagrees with pulling out and insists on supporting our allies. He's talking about the Kurds if you don't know.
Also, I want you to reread what you wrote. You are so tribal talking about Mattis wasn't liked by the Dems ladda ladda. Who gives a fvck about R vs D? You keep bringing it up... tribal warfare is NOT a way to view the world.
 
Wrong I never said that. jfc. all this nonesense about MSM blah blah . Just READ HIS RESIGNATION LETTER:
Dear Mr. President:

I have been privileged to serve as our country’s 26th Secretary of Defense which has allowed me to serve alongside our men and women of the Department in defense of our citizens and our ideals.

I am proud of the progress that has been made over the past two years on some of the key goals articulated in our National Defense Strategy: putting the Department on a more sound budgetary footing, improving readiness and lethality in our forces, and reforming the Department’s business practices for greater performance. Our troops continue to provide the capabilities needed to prevail in conflict and sustain strong US global influence.

One core belief I have always held is that our strength as a nation is inextricably linked to the strength of our unique and comprehensive system of alliances and partnerships. While the US remains the indispensable nation in the free world, we cannot protect our interests or serve that role effectively without maintaining strong alliances and showing respect to those allies. Like you, I have said from the beginning that the armed forces of the United States should not be the policeman of the world. Instead, we must use all tools of American power to provide for the common defense, including providing effective leadership to our alliances. NATO’s 29 democracies demonstrated that strength in their commitment to fighting alongside us following the 9-11 attack on America. The Defeat-ISIS coalition of 74 nations is further proof.

Similarly, I believe we must be resolute and unambiguous in our approach to those countries whose strategic interests are increasingly in tension with ours. It is clear that China and Russia, for example, want to shape a world consistent with their authoritarian model—gaining veto authority over other nations’ economic, diplomatic, and security decisions—to promote their own interests at the expense of their neighbors, America and our allies. That is why we must use all the tools of American power to provide for the common defense.

My views on treating allies with respect and also being clear-eyed about both malign actors and strategic competitors are strongly held and informed by over four decades of immersion in these issues. We must do everything possible to advance an international order that is most conducive to our security, prosperity and values, and we are strengthened in this effort by the solidarity of our alliances.


Because you have the right to a Secretary of Defense whose views are better aligned with yours on these and other subjects, I believe it is right for me to step down from my position. The end date for my tenure is February 28, 2019, a date that should allow sufficient time for a successor to be nominated and confirmed as well as to make sure the Department’s interests are properly articulated and protected at upcoming events to include Congressional posture hearings and the NATO Defense Ministerial meeting in February. Further, that a full transition to a new Secretary of Defense occurs well in advance of the transition of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in September in order to ensure stability within the Department.

I pledge my full effort to a smooth transition that ensures the needs and interests of the 2.15 million Service Members and 732,079 DoD civilians receive undistracted attention of the Department at all times so that they can fulfill their critical, round-the-clock mission to protect the American people.

I very much appreciate this opportunity to serve the nation and our men and women in uniform.

James N. Mattis

My point remains that he is claiming victory while retreating and Mattis clearly is telling him here he disagrees with pulling out and insists on supporting our allies. He's talking about the Kurds if you don't know.

Mattis is not disputing that ISIS is defeated. He just does not agree with leaving the middle east. He supports a permanent American military presence in the middle east. He did the honorable thing and resigned due to the big disagreement. POTUS campaigned on getting out of the unending military occupations in the middle east and without the two chemical attacks that made no sense why Assad would have executed either, then the withdrawal would have already occurred. That's why conspiracy theorists look at possible false flag attacks there. I threw this in just for you since I know you love QANON...LOL.
 
Also, I want you to reread what you wrote. You are so tribal talking about Mattis wasn't liked by the Dems ladda ladda. Who gives a fvck about R vs D? You keep bringing it up... tribal warfare is NOT a way to view the world.

You're lecturing me about tribalism? I've seen it all now, lol.
 
You are just completely unable to look inward.

...If being an anti-globalist, pro American sovereignty, equal justice under the law, pro-military (peace through strength), anti-socialism, freedom of religion believing, gun owning, red blooded son of an Air Force pilot turned farmer, makes me a "tribalist", then color me tribal. One question: does that make me worst than an open borders, one world order communist? Are the Yellow Vests in France tribalist? The Brexit voters in GB tribalist? The Antifa facists, are they tribalist? Why am I a tribalist and you are not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerGrowls
...If being an anti-globalist, pro American sovereignty, equal justice under the law, pro-military (peace through strength), anti-socialism, freedom of religion believing, gun owning, red blooded son of an Air Force pilot turned farmer, makes me a "tribalist", then color me tribal. One question: does that make me worst than an open borders, one world order communist? Are the Yellow Vests in France tribalist? The Brexit voters in GB tribalist? The Antifa facists, are they tribalist? Why am I a tribalist and you are not.

Incredibly well said! Amen!
 
Why am I a tribalist and you are not.
Because I follow a set of ideals but you follow a man. You don't even realize you can't be both a conservative Republican and an anti-globalist without already having compromised your ideals.
 
Because I follow a set of ideals but you follow a man. You don't even realize you can't be both a conservative Republican and an anti-globalist without already having compromised your ideals.

I disagree with your statement profoundly. I am a conservative libertarian to be honest that more closely identifies with republican party policies and am most definitely a nationalist. I am not an isolationist, but lets take care of our own first at all times. Trump has been a game changer as the republican and democratic party had become a two headed monster talking different views but in the end doing basically the same thing. Lots of liars breaking campaign promises year after year with weak excuses full of more lies.

Like him or hate him, Donald Trump has kept his word more than any POTUS ever in my opinion.

Check it out >> http://www.magapill.com
 
Because I follow a set of ideals but you follow a man. You don't even realize you can't be both a conservative Republican and an anti-globalist without already having compromised your ideals.

This is way off base for me. If you think conservatism embraces globalism, you are the one breaking with your values. I do not follow any man, except Jesus Christ, as I am also a Christian.
True globalism is the enemy of freedom. True globalism is the antithesis of Liberty.
 
This is way off base for me. If you think conservatism embraces globalism, you are the one breaking with your values.
"Over the past 200 years, not only has the argument against tariffs and trade barriers won nearly universal agreement among economists but it has also proven itself in the real world, where we have seen free-trading nations prosper while protectionist countries fall behind.

America’s most recent experiment with protectionism was a disaster for the working men and women of this country. When Congress passed the Smoot-Hawley tariff in 1930, we were told that it would protect America from foreign competition and save jobs in this country—the same line we hear today. The actual result was the Great Depression, the worst economic catastrophe in our history" - Ronald Reagan

Conservatism DOES embrace globalism, it was the Right that brought the Left around on the issue, not the other way around. You have an incorrect view of history.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT